Proposal: Things to be nerfed

Don Incognito · Jun 2, 2009

The way I read it, RoB is three attacks. That's strong, but not TOO strong. As a fighter, I'll probably be taking Giant Swing at 3rd level anyway. Can't we just agree that RoB is three attacks and be done with it?

JoeNotCharles · Jun 2, 2009

Don Incognito said:
The way I read it, RoB is three attacks.

Why do people keep saying this? RoB is clearly four attacks. If you think that's too strong, and it should be three attacks, that's a house rule.

Ozymandias79 · Jun 2, 2009

I also see RoB as 3 potential attacks and not 4.

JoeNotCharles · Jun 2, 2009

You know what? After reading up on the power more, I've changed my mind.

PHB2, page 218:

Sequence: The order of information in a power
description is a general guide to the sequence in
which the power’s various effects occur. For example,
an “Effect” entry might appear above attack information
in a power description to indicate that something
happens before you make the attack.
Indentation: When information is indented in
a power description, that means the information is
contingent on the information directly above it. For
example, a “Secondary Attack” entry indented below
a “Hit” entry is a reminder that you can make the secondary
attack only if you hit with the primary attack.

p219:

Secondary Target and Secondary Attack:
Some powers allow you to make secondary (or even
tertiary) attacks. A “Hit,” a “Miss,” or an “Effect” entry
tells you when to make a secondary attack.

PHB, p79:

Rain of Blows Fighter Attack 3
You become a blur of motion, raining a series of blows upon your
opponent.
Encounter ✦ Martial, Weapon
Standard Action Melee weapon
Primary Target: One creature
Attack: Strength vs. AC, two attacks
Hit: 1[W] + Strength modifier damage.
....Weapon: If you’re wielding a light blade, a spear, or a flail
....and have Dexterity 15 or higher, make a secondary attack.
....Secondary Target: The same or a different target
....Secondary Attack: Strength vs. AC
....Hit: 1[W] + Strength modifier damage.

(Had to use .'s cause the board keeps removing my indentation.)

This is as clear as any of the multi-attack powers are (that is, not very): make two attacks. If you hit, do 1[W] + Strength modifier damage and make a secondary attack. (We're assuming here the character is using the right weapon and has enough Dex.) So when there are two attacks, what does "if you hit" mean?

The only possible ways I can see to read this that fit the rules are:

1. Make two attack rolls. If one or both hit, the whole attack counts as a hit, so do 1[W] + Strength modifier damage and make a secondary attack. If neither hit, the whole attack counts as a miss.
2. Make two attack rolls. If both hit, the whole attack counts as a hit, so do 1[W] + Strength modifier damage and make a secondary attack. If one or both miss, the whole attack counts as a miss.
3. Make two separate attacks. For each one, if it hits, do 1[W] + Strength modifier damage and make a secondary attack.

But there's no reading of the rules that lets you do damage but not make a secondary attack. If you think you only get one secondary attack, than you can only do damage once too.

Interpretation 2 is obviously crazy, since it makes a power that's actually worse than a basic attack. So we're left with interpretation 1 or 3.

Now compare Twin Strike (PHB, p105):

Twin Strike Ranger Attack 1
If the first attack doesn’t kill it, the second one might.
At-Will ✦ Martial,Weapon
Standard Action Melee or Ranged weapon
Requirement: You must be wielding two melee weapons or a
ranged weapon.
Targets: One or two creatures
Attack: Strength vs. AC (melee; main weapon and off-hand
weapon) or Dexterity vs. AC (ranged), two attacks
Hit: 1[W] damage per attack.
Increase damage to 2[W] at 21st level.

Notice the Hit: line clearly says "per attack". In Rain of Blows, the hit line doesn't say that.

So Interpretation 1 is correct. Rain of Blows is really 1 or 2 attacks: the first one gets two attack rolls, keeping the higher, and if that hits you get a second attack.

Or you can say that they just forgot to write "per attack" on the hit line, and Interpretation 3 is correct. Rain of Blows is 2 to 4 attacks.

But now that the indentation has been clarified, I don't see any way to read this so that it maxes out at 3 attacks.

Don Incognito · Jun 2, 2009

You make 2 attacks if you're holding, say, an axe. If you have a spear / light blade / flail, you instead make 3.

The secondary attack is only one attack.

covaithe · Jun 2, 2009

I don't buy it. All the indented bit spells out what happens on a hit, and it includes a secondary attack. You can hit up to two times; it seems pretty clear to me that this gives up to two secondary attacks. Of the arguments to the contrary that I've seen, the contrast with twin strike is the only one that's even remotely convincing. Still, I think it far more likely that the power's author meant "for each hit, make a secondary attack" but left it out because it seemed obvious, than that they meant "if either attack hits, make a single secondary attack..." and left it out. The latter is sufficiently complex logic, and sufficiently non-obvious from the layout of the power, that I feel pretty strongly that if they meant that, they should have said so explicitly.

renau1g · Jun 2, 2009

Stupid vagueness, you'd think WOTC would put this in errata and close it out. I agree with covaithe though, it really shouldn't be compared with twin strike (an at-will) as the designers should try and make encounter powers better than at-wills. Secondly, it does say 1 or 2 attacks, then there's a secondary effect, that secondary effect triggers from the attack, of which there is 1 or 2, generating either 1 or 2 secondary effects.

JoeNotCharles · Jun 2, 2009

Don Incognito said:
You make 2 attacks if you're holding, say, an axe. If you have a spear / light blade / flail, you instead make 3.

The secondary attack is only one attack.

Please explain how there can be only one secondary attack, but more than one damage roll, when both are attached to a "Hit" line.

Don Incognito · Jun 2, 2009

I'll dispute this when I get home. I'm pretty sure the weapon line is separate from the hit line.

Like, 95% sure.

Atanatotatos · Jun 2, 2009

Well, ok, but to go back to what's relevant for the proposal, it seems to me that everyone agrees that four attacks is definitely too much, while three is better. So, again, why don't we just make a proposal that in L4W RoB can only grant one secondary attack?